23 replies to this topic

[jacobkristensen]

Hi are there anybody out there that has the bulldozer from 2007 and would care todo a good review off it?
Like those of Sariel, Blackbird and technicbricks.blogspot.com ?

Because I am starting to looking to recent history of LPSS/PSS/PF(Lego Power Functions System), from 8275 up till the release of the 9398 and the 8043 in between.
Like what reason TLG could have to relase the dozer without the LA for the bucket/blade and the show how it could be done next year in the b-model of the 8043.

It simply makes me thinking about if the considering release the dozer in a few year with the new PF RC2 units and once again uses the PF XL, witch I haven't seen i a technic since there release.(And I don't have the 8275 and I have come to regret quit alot since...)

Sorry guys, I should have used the search function. There is a review here.:

http://www.eurobrick...0&st=0&p=180947

[Blakbird]

jacobkristensen, on 20 July 2012 - 11:39 PM, said:

Hi are there anybody out there that has the bulldozer from 2007 and would care todo a good review off it?
Like those of Sariel, Blackbird and technicbricks.blogspot.com ?

Because I am starting to looking to recent history of LPSS/PSS/PF(Lego Power Functions System), from 8275 up till the release of the 9398 and the 8043 in between.
Like what reason TLG could have to relase the dozer without the LA for the bucket/blade and the show how it could be done next year in the b-model of the 8043.

The 8275 was the very first Power Functions model, so everything in it was new. Remember that the 8043 B-model is a track loader, not a dozer. A loader needs to lift the load up high which is why it uses the linear actuators. The range of motion of a dozer blade is very small so it doesn't need them. I actually like the mechanical way that 8275 did it very much.

8275 is by far the fastest of the PF models. The others are 8043 (super slow), and 9398 (slow). The 8043 B-model is pretty quick and comparable to 8275. The skid steer performance of 8275 is amazing. It will turn in place very rapidly.

Also keep in mind that LEGO's choice NOT to use the linear actuator for the blade is the only reason the 8275 came with 4 of those pneumatic actuator brackets. All of the MOCs which use those would probably not have been possible without the availability increasing because of that set. The only other source is 8421 and not many people are parting that out. Even so, that part is selling for $20+ each.

By the way, if you want to find reviews there is an easier way than searching manually. Just go to the "Set Index" link up in the Eurobricks title bar and it has the ability to search for any set and find reviews.

Edited by Blakbird, 21 July 2012 - 12:15 AM.

[allanp]

Another reason they didn't inlude LAs is cos they wern't released until the year after.

The vaue of this set depend on what you want it for. If you want lots of PF parts (2 XL motors, 2 M motors, 2 recievers (version 1), 1 battery box and 1 transmitter) and tracks then it's a good buy. However if you are looking for a good model with lots of mechanicle complexity then it's not so good.

8258 also comes with an XL motor (as well as battery box and pole reverser switch). Not so good as a source of PF parts but includes LAs ( ) and lots of mechanicle goodness.

[RohanBeckett]

Blakbird, on 21 July 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

Also keep in mind that LEGO's choice NOT to use the linear actuator for the blade is the only reason the 8275 came with 4 of those pneumatic actuator brackets. All of the MOCs which use those would probably not have been possible without the availability increasing because of that set. The only other source is 8421 and not many people are parting that out. Even so, that part is selling for $20+ each.

Bah.. one of mine broke a while ago.. (just disintegrated in my hand one day)... I've been meaning to look up bricklink, and see how much they were!!

I wonder if I should call Lego, and see if they have any spares in stock? ;)

RB

[SheepEater]

I agree about 8275 being fine the way it is, without actuators.

Actuators are a poor piece. I refused to buy most 2008-2009 technic sets because of them. To this day I only have 2 sets with them: 8265 and 8043 and one of them is already broken!

Edited by SheepEater, 21 July 2012 - 04:06 PM.

[Technic Gearhead]

I'm currently building the 8275 right now.  I didn't like all of the studded pieces that comprise the blade so I have replaced them with Technic parts.  It is coming along nicely but I still have to work out a few more details elsewhere to complete the update.  I have a sealed set but decided to piece this one together since I had planned on a few changes anyways.  I'll post some images of the completed model soon.  

I just finished an updated version of the 8421 Mobile Crane.  I'll start a separate thread explaining some of the minor changes in more detail but here is a link to some images for now.

http://www.brickshel...ry.cgi?f=508139

[skylinedan]

The updated 8421 looks nice, I like your use of new pieces over the older stud type. Going all yellow is is different, I think with yellow rims it looks a little better versus the grey ones, You need some yellow wedge blocks for the back to hid the battery box. Where did you get the orange borok pieces on the boom, LOL. I,ve got a bunch of black one, need to send ya couple, LOL.


  Dan

[Technic Gearhead]

skylinedan, on 21 July 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

The updated 8421 looks nice, I like your use of new pieces over the older stud type. Going all yellow is is different, I think with yellow rims it looks a little better versus the grey ones, You need some yellow wedge blocks for the back to hid the battery box. Where did you get the orange borok pieces on the boom, LOL. I,ve got a bunch of black one, need to send ya couple, LOL.


  Dan

Thanks for the comments.  I thought the yellow 8264 wheels would help freshen it up a bit.  I replaced just about all of the black pieces with dark bluish gray ones so I decided to do something different with the boom brace.  It's only available in black or orange.  I opted for orange to signify that modern PF parts are on board since they all have bits of orange.  I fully intended to cover up the battery box with a combination of smooth panels similar to the 8053 but later decided the exposed battery box looked fine for now.

Edited by Technic Gearhead, 21 July 2012 - 09:02 PM.

[Technic Gearhead]

Blakbird, on 21 July 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

Also keep in mind that LEGO's choice NOT to use the linear actuator for the blade is the only reason the 8275 came with 4 of those pneumatic actuator brackets. All of the MOCs which use those would probably not have been possible without the availability increasing because of that set. The only other source is 8421 and not many people are parting that out. Even so, that part is selling for $20+ each.

I would love to have some more of those brackets for future needs but shelling out twenty-spots per gets old in a hurry!  I could get four 1x6 thin yellow 'Power Puller' liftarms for that!  

[jacobkristensen]

Blackbird, I can most your arguments and tend to agree with them. And I have longe decide not to buy the dozer because is cost 200% of the price it was release at on bricklink.

I more just that I wonder how much of a premade plan that lego had premade plan for PF back in 2007.



So as it looks right now I am, not buying the old dozer nore the 9398(crawler) insteade I found a uses but never opended 8043 that is about €47 cheaper than on BL:cry_happy:

[SheepEater]

I just built the 8043 B Model (tracked loader). Very impressed. It's very fast, and better than the 8275 and that says a lot since I love the 8275!

Since the 8043 is VERY cheap on bricklink, I'm almost tempted to buy a second one just for the tracked loader.

Edited by SheepEater, 23 July 2012 - 06:08 PM.

[jacobkristensen]

SheepEater, on 23 July 2012 - 06:08 PM, said:

I just built the 8043 B Model (tracked loader). Very impressed. It's very fast, and better than the 8275 and that says a lot since I love the 8275!

Since the 8043 is VERY cheap on bricklink, I'm almost tempted to buy a second one just for the tracked loader.

Well I tell you one think I am looking forward to getting mine to, and what even more I am going also to get a dwarfhamster or goldhamster. I it gonna depend a bit on the seller.

[Foggy]

I'm looking for a 8275, wait for the right price on ebay.. and I think to buy another 8043 too 'cause i want to have both models

[jacobkristensen]

Foggy, on 24 July 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

I'm looking for a 8275, wait for the right price on ebay.. and I think to buy another 8043 too 'cause i want to have both models

Foggy - I understand you, but the thing is that a couple of years ago I brought four pf-xl off lego@shop some I am not really in need of electric pf stuff from the dozer.

[Traktor]

I was lucky and got two bulldozers for about 75 dollar each, used but both in good condition. The PF parts alone are probably worth more than I paid, and concidering that it costed almost 300 dollar new here in Norway when it was released I am very happy.

[Crazydance]

Traktor, on 25 July 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

I was lucky and got two bulldozers for about 75 dollar each, used but both in good condition. The PF parts alone are probably worth more than I paid, and concidering that it costed almost 300 dollar new here in Norway when it was released I am very happy.

I have one here, with the right batteries it could lift itself off the tracks!
It's pretty insane and showed off the raw power of the PF elements in there.
It's one of the best PF models I've seen out there. Closely followed by the 4*4 crawler.
The dozer actually feels like a casing for all the PF elements, there's THAT much electronics in there.
Seeing that you allready have 4 motors, 2 IR recievers and a transmitter it's a lot of bang for your buck.

Comparing it to newer models the only model that feels worth the money PF-wise is the new crawler, you'll get different motors and the IR system.
The 8043 has 4 (!!!) m motors but you still have one type of motor. When you start with PF I should recommend investing money in a set that has IR elements and different motor types.

Talking about motors there aren't many sets using the XL motor. Is there any reason for that?
(Info: Only three sets, 8275, the creator monster dino (2007) and the crane truck (2009))

[Traktor]

Even though you only get one type of motors in 8043 i still think it is just as good investment as the 8275, since it after all got two ir receiver (which are very expensive if you were to buy them separately) and two controllers which also are expensive. But i have to agree 8275 is just a magnificent PF model, and I am really glad that I have "secured" two of them. I also got 3x 8043, so I think I am good one the PF side for a while, only wish I had some more of the new Servo. But I am do not think 8043 is going to be as rare as 8275, unfortunately.

[TechnicFreak]

jacobkristensen, on 20 July 2012 - 11:39 PM, said:

Hi are there anybody out there that has the bulldozer from 2007 and would care todo a good review off it?
Like those of Sariel, Blackbird and technicbricks.blogspot.com ?

Because I am starting to looking to recent history of LPSS/PSS/PF(Lego Power Functions System), from 8275 up till the release of the 9398 and the 8043 in between.
Like what reason TLG could have to relase the dozer without the LA for the bucket/blade and the show how it could be done next year in the b-model of the 8043.

It simply makes me thinking about if the considering release the dozer in a few year with the new PF RC2 units and once again uses the PF XL, witch I haven't seen i a technic since there release.(And I don't have the 8275 and I have come to regret quit alot since...)

Sorry guys, I should have used the search function. There is a review here.:

http://www.eurobrick...0&st=0&p=180947

A bit off topic, but I believe the 8275 was the best RC Lego ever produced, even the 8043, though the b model track loader was great too, both the 8275 and 8043 track loader both work smoothly and flawlessly, luckily I picked the 8275 up since it had such a short production run.  Sometime in the winter of '07-'08 I even plowed through an inch of snow with it (powdery snow, not the wet stuff, didn't want to damage the motors) and it went right through it, just shook loose the snow when I was done, the neighbors were impressed. Even the inspiration model intrigues me, I dismantled the dozer and am going to build that model, install a cab, and try to figure out how to hide all the wiring harnesses in back and use it as a logging tree feller. I don't have the $$$ for the 9398 now, but I'm more into construction vehicles anyway, but the 9396 helicopter looked real interesting especially with the PF added in, so I picked that up along with the 9393 just for the 'b' model buggy racer.  Why you might ask?  Because I love the color lime, last good model with lime was the 8649 Nitro Menace, though it was in the Racers lineup technically, most all the underpinnings were pure Technic.

[SheepEater]

TechnicFreak, on 01 August 2012 - 11:01 PM, said:

last good model with lime was the 8649 Nitro Menace, though it was in the Racers lineup technically, most all the underpinnings were pure Technic.

Since around 2002 many Racers sets qualify for being technic. Notably, the classic 8461 BMW Williams (pretty much a recoloring of an actual "Technic" set, 8458), and the two awesome RC cars 8475 and 8366 which I still think are the fastest official Lego models yet, with arguably the most powerful technic motor yet (also used in 8421 and 8287). There were many others but those 3 were my favorite "Racers" technic.

I love the 8275 the way it is. I wouldn't add linear actuators to it (I LOVE the way they did the mechanisms using only lots of gears   ) and pneumatics would have made it unnecessarily complex and too expensive, considering the amount of PF parts in it.

Well, actually, there's one thing it lacked - headlights! But that is very easily solved with the PF part, with no additional part. Just remove the 1x2 yellow plates!

Edited by SheepEater, 01 August 2012 - 11:14 PM.

[Crazydance]

SheepEater, on 01 August 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

I love the 8275 the way it is. I wouldn't add linear actuators to it (I LOVE the way they did the mechanisms using only lots of gears   ) and pneumatics would have made it unnecessarily complex and too expensive, considering the amount of PF parts in it.

Well, actually, there's one thing it lacked - headlights! But that is very easily solved with the PF part, with no additional part. Just remove the 1x2 yellow plates!

I don't know any people that would go out with a bulldozer in the middle of the night, but it's a simple addition which makes your 8275 just look nicer.
You could even do two of those to force those red back-lights as well I guess. I'm happy that people share my thought on where it should be in top-x lists;
Right on the top where it belongs, closely followed by the crawler, and with the 8043 as third with all it's technical 'flaws'.

Which technic models are RC anyway?

- 8275
- 8043
- 2012 Crawler

Am I missing one?

[RohanBeckett]

Unless you're counting the RC (RF, rather than Infrared!) series of Racers Cars, which were pretty much all studless technic parts anyway

RB

[Crazydance]

RohanBeckett, on 05 August 2012 - 02:45 PM, said:

Unless you're counting the RC (RF, rather than Infrared!) series of Racers Cars, which were pretty much all studless technic parts anyway

RB

Jeah but the motorisation pars didn't leave anything to build size-wise as I recall. You were somewhat limited to the size of those motor-bases.

[skylinedan]

I picked up a 8275 today for 225 on ebay, I think that was a fare price considering I,ve seen some go for over 400 in past couple months. I got it more for the part factor, than the set, but that being said I,ll still build it. I like the set, but I can see a few things that could be changed to make it a better one. Its a nice set for sure, one that any collector should have in there invintory .

Dan

[jorgeopesi]

Is a great buy and a perfect set to make it MOD, it has a lot of place to make more mechanism, I always thought that the set was a komatsu d475.